SMT. RESHMIBEN P. KANUGO,VADODARA vs. ITO, WARD-3(1)(3), VADODARA

In the result appeal filed the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Madhumita Roysl. Ita No(S) Asset. Appeal(S) By No(S) Year(S) Appellant Vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 2131/Ahd/2018 2014-15 Smt. Reshmiben P. Income Tax Kanugo, Officer, 26, Jawahar Society, Nr. Ward 3(1)(3), Bakrawadi, R.V. Desai Vadodara. Road, Vadodara, Gujarat-390001. Pan: Azupk6721B 2. 2132/Ahd/2018 2014-15 Shri Alpesh P. Income Tax Kanugo(Huf), Officer, 26, Jawahar Society, Ward 3(1)(3), Nr. Bakrawadi, Ahmedabad. R.V. Desai Road, Vadodara-390001. Pan: Aajha5173P 3. 2133/Ahd/2018 2014-15 Shri Parasmal B. Kanugo Income Tax Officer, (Huf), Ward-3(1)(3), 26, Jawahar Society, Nr. Ahmedabad. Bakrawadi, R.V. Desai Road, Vadodara, Gujarat-390001. Pan: Aakhp0126Q

disallowance of claim of exempted long term capital gain on sale of shares of Ms. Shree Shaleen Textiles Ltd.[(SHRSH

SHAILESH SUBODHCHANDRA JHAVERI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed for both the year under consideration

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

long-term capital gain on sale of shares by assessee was an arranged affair to convert its own unaccounted money through accommodation entries and assessee failed to prove genuineness of transaction, exemption claimed under section 10(38) on sale of shares had rightly been disallowed

SHAILESH S. JHAVERI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CENT. CIRCLE-1(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed for both the year under consideration

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

long-term capital gain on sale of shares by assessee was an arranged affair to convert its own unaccounted money through accommodation entries and assessee failed to prove genuineness of transaction, exemption claimed under section 10(38) on sale of shares had rightly been disallowed

SHAILESH SUBODHCHANDRA JHAVERI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed for both the year under consideration

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

long-term capital gain on sale of shares by assessee was an arranged affair to convert its own unaccounted money through accommodation entries and assessee failed to prove genuineness of transaction, exemption claimed under section 10(38) on sale of shares had rightly been disallowed

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-5,, AHMEDABAD vs. NIRMA CHEMICALS WORKS PVT.LTD., AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

long term capital gain on share or securities under section 10(38), it is prerequisite that on transfer of such share or securities, Securities Transaction Tax must have been paid, but in the present case of the assessee, same has not been done. Rather the learned CIT(A) has given a categorical finding that the assessee has paid taxes

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-5,, AHMEDABAD vs. NIRMA CHEMICALS WORKS PVT.LTD., AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

long term capital gain on share or securities under section 10(38), it is prerequisite that on transfer of such share or securities, Securities Transaction Tax must have been paid, but in the present case of the assessee, same has not been done. Rather the learned CIT(A) has given a categorical finding that the assessee has paid taxes

NIRMA CHEMICAL WORKS PVT.LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT.,CIRCLE-5,, AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

long term capital gain on share or securities under section 10(38), it is prerequisite that on transfer of such share or securities, Securities Transaction Tax must have been paid, but in the present case of the assessee, same has not been done. Rather the learned CIT(A) has given a categorical finding that the assessee has paid taxes

NIRMA CHEMICALS WORKS PVT.LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT.,CIRCLE-5,, AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

long term capital gain on share or securities under section 10(38), it is prerequisite that on transfer of such share or securities, Securities Transaction Tax must have been paid, but in the present case of the assessee, same has not been done. Rather the learned CIT(A) has given a categorical finding that the assessee has paid taxes

THE ACIT, CIRCLE-5,, AHMEDABAD vs. NIRMA CHEMICALS WORKS PVT.LTD., AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

long term capital gain on share or securities under section 10(38), it is prerequisite that on transfer of such share or securities, Securities Transaction Tax must have been paid, but in the present case of the assessee, same has not been done. Rather the learned CIT(A) has given a categorical finding that the assessee has paid taxes

NIRMA CHEMICALS WORKS PVT.LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT.,CIRCLE-5,, AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

long term capital gain on share or securities under section 10(38), it is prerequisite that on transfer of such share or securities, Securities Transaction Tax must have been paid, but in the present case of the assessee, same has not been done. Rather the learned CIT(A) has given a categorical finding that the assessee has paid taxes

ALPA UDAYKUMAR SHAH,,BHAVNAGAR vs. ITO, WARD-1(2),, BHAVNAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal, Judicial Memebr

long-term capital gain shown by the assessee. Likewise we also note that the assessee has discharged the onus imposed under section 68 of the Act by furnishing the necessary documentary evidence in support of the identity, genuineness of transaction and creditworthiness of the parties. Therefore the same cannot be made subject to tax under the provisions of section

VISHAL EXPORTS OVERSEAS LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-8,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, ground No.7 raised by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Royassessment Year:2009-10 Vishal Exports Overseas Ltd., The Acit, Circle-8, 301 Sheel Complex, 4 Mayur Colony, Vs Ahmebada. Nr. Mithakhali Six Road, Ahmedabad-380009. Pan :Aaacv 2354 D (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee By : Ms Urvashi Shodhan, Advocate Revenue By : Shria. P. Singh, Sr. Dr सुनवाईक"तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 21/04/2022 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement: 29/06/2022 आदेश/O R D E R

term capital gain u/s 50 of the Act. Therefore, disallowance of depreciation of Rs.30,49,418/- was upheld and confirmed by ld CIT(A). 26. However, we note that block is existing and for that Ld. Counsel took us through the paper book at page no.23 wherein we noted that block of the windmill is in existence and the assessee

SMT. MEERA ALPESH KANUGO,VADODARA vs. ITO, WARD-3(1)(3), VADODARA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

disallowance of claim of exempted long term capital gain on sale of shares of Ms. Shree Shaleen I.T.A No. 2130/Ahd/2018

RASILABEN YOGESHBHAI PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-5(3)(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.631/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year:2014-15 Rasilaben Yogeshbhai Patel, I.T.O., 19, Jitendrapark Society, Vs. Ward-5(3)(2), Narayan Nagar Road, Ahmedabad. Paldi, Ahmedabad-380007. Pan: Aehpp4960P

long term capital gain at Rs.29,27,396/- . 3.6. The AO allowed the investment in the purchase of new property for calculating the exemption u/s 54 of the Act and further construction in newly purchased property was not allowed as both were not admissible. The AO noted that as per the provisions of section 54 exemption is allowed either purchaser

THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD vs. SHRI KAILASH RAMAVATAR GOENKA, AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

Long-Term Capital Gains (Khoraj - AY 2019-20): Rs. 3,76,77,305/-. • Short-Term Capital Gains (Silver Harmony - AY 2020-21): Rs. 33,17,936/-. 10.1. Accordingly, the AO was directed to tax the capital gains year-wise under the appropriate heads and provide relief for the disallowed

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2 1 1, AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. BHARAT LAKHAJI NANDWANA, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Department is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

disallowance of exemption u/s 54 and 54EC of the Act as the assessee does not fulfill the basic conditions prescribed under sections 54 and 54EC of the Act for claiming such exemption. 2. The appellant craves leave to amend or alter any ground or add a new ground, which may be necessary. DCIT vs. Bharat Lakhaji Nandwana Asst. Year

NITIN BHAILALBHAI THAKKAR,VADODARA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(2), VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-Assessment Year : 2011-12 Nitin Bhailalbhai Thakkar, The Acit, C/O. Jagdish Foods Pvt. Ltd., Vs Circle 1(1)(2), Ramji Mandir Pole, Kothi Road, Baroda Raopura, Vadodara-390001 Pan : Abapt 7939 G अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : None Revenue By : Ms. M.M. Garg, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 03/10/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 03/10/2022

long term capital gains. And not the amount of balance capital gains after deduction of exemption. In your assessee's case, the capital gains is Rs. 7918030/-[sale value Rs. 10720000/-less indexed cost of Acquisition Rs.2801970/-] as against the capital gains adopted of Rs. 5918030/- by the audit party. The exemption

SHAILESH M PATEL-HUF,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-3(3)(5), AHMEDDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 280/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2015-16 Shailesh M. Patel Huf, Income Tax Officer, C/O Ketan H. Shah, Advocate, Vs. Ward-3(3)(5), 512, Times Square-I, Ahmedabad. Opp. Ram Baug Bunglow, Thaltej Shilaj Road, Ahmedabad.

long term capital gain earned on sale of share of both companies is concern. 8.7 We also draw support and guidance from the judgment of Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Prem pal Gandhi reported in 94 Taxmann.com 156 wherein it was held as under: “the documents on which the Assessing Officer relied